Evaluating the calculated dry deposition velocities of reactive nitrogen oxides and ozone from two community models over a temperate deciduous forest
Wu, Z; Wang, X; Chen, F; Turnipseed, AA; Guenther, AB; Niyogi, D; Charusombat, U; Xia, B; William munger, J; Alapaty, K
HERO ID
783823
Reference Type
Journal Article
Year
2011
Language
English
| HERO ID | 783823 |
|---|---|
| In Press | No |
| Year | 2011 |
| Title | Evaluating the calculated dry deposition velocities of reactive nitrogen oxides and ozone from two community models over a temperate deciduous forest |
| Authors | Wu, Z; Wang, X; Chen, F; Turnipseed, AA; Guenther, AB; Niyogi, D; Charusombat, U; Xia, B; William munger, J; Alapaty, K |
| Journal | Atmospheric Environment |
| Volume | 45 |
| Issue | 16 |
| Page Numbers | 2663-2674 |
| Abstract | Hourly measurements of O(3), NO, NO(2), PAN, HNO(3) and NO(y) concentrations, and eddy-covariance fluxes of O(3) and NO(y) over a temperate deciduous forest from June to November, 2000 were used to evaluate the dry deposition velocities (V(d)) estimated by the WRF-Chem dry deposition module (WDDM), which adopted Wesely (1989) scheme for surface resistance (R(c)), and the Noah land surface model coupled with a photosynthesis-based Gas-exchange Evapotranspiration Model (Noah-GEM). Noah-GEM produced better V(d)(O(3)) variations due to its more realistically simulated stomata! resistance (R(s)) than WDDM. V(d)(O(3)) is very sensitive to the minimum canopy stomatal resistance (R(i)) which is specified for each seasonal category assigned in WDDM. Treating Sep-Oct as autumn in WDDM for this deciduous forest site caused a large underprediction of Vd(O(3)) due to the leafless assumption in 'autumn' seasonal category for which an infinite R(i) was assigned. Reducing R(i) to a value of 70 s m(-1), the same as the default value for the summer season category, the modeled and measured V(d)(O(3)) agreed reasonably well. HNO(3) was found to dominate the NO(y) flux during the measurement period: thus the modeled V(d)(NO(y)) was mainly controlled by the aerodynamic and quasi-laminar sublayer resistances (R(a) and R(b)), both being sensitive to the surface roughness length (z(0)). Using an aropriate value for z(0) (10% of canopy height), WDDM and Noah-GEM agreed well with the observed daytime V(d)(NO(y)). The differences in V(d)(HNO(3)) between WDDM and Noah-GEM were small due to the small differences in the calculated R(a) and R(b) between the two models: however, the differences in R(c) of NO(2) and PAN between the two models reached a factor of 1.1-1.5, which in turn caused a factor of 1.1-1.3 differences for V(d). Combining the measured concentrations and modeled V(d), NO(x), PAN and HNO(3) accounted for 19%, 4%, and 70% of the measured NO(y) fluxes, respectively. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. |
| Doi | 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.02.063 |
| Wosid | WOS:000290886000006 |
| Url | http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1352231011002275 |
| Is Certified Translation | No |
| Dupe Override | No |
| Comments | Source: Web of Science WOS:000290886000006 |
| Is Public | Yes |
| Language Text | English |
| Keyword | Reactive nitrogen oxides; Ozone; Dry depositon velocity; WRF-Chem dry deposition module; Noah-GEM; 1-D model |
| Is Qa | No |